Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Elephant

Kakafika's page

Goblin Squad Member. 654 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS

1 to 50 of 654 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Goblin Squad Member

Being is KC's puppet? SPIES IN PHAEROS!!!11!

Goblin Squad Member

I hope to be relatively successful as a merchant/gatherer by minimizing my PvP losses through stealth, guile, diplomacy, and swift vengeance.

Goblin Squad Member

Player-run Farms and Lumberyards will be POIs, I think.

The explanation given by the developers is that when we enter the world, we only see ourselves, the elite adventurers, gatherers, and craft foremen. In the background, there is a multitude of 'small folk' keeping our settlements running (manning the auction house, doing the actual crafting, etc).

These small folk will be more noticeable, though still invisible and abstracted, when the War of Towers ends and settlements start dealing with Development Indices. One of the resources is Bulk Food used to feed them and grow the population.

Goblin Squad Member

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Tyveil wrote:
My experience for probably the first week of playing was largely the same as yours, very frustrating. The number of feats at the start is overwhelming. They need to do something to make this easier for new players, though I'm not sure what that will be. Since so much to do with feats is based on matching keywords, I think that matching keyword highlighting will help. But I do also think they should somehow reduce the number of feats available at the start.

I thought this at the beginning, too, but kept my mouth shut until I had a better understanding of the game systems.

Now, I'm confident they could narrow down the number of combat feats (maybe attacks, armor, and role feature feats) for new players without making things 'weird' or 'unfair.' One option is to gate half of them behind Adventurer 1 (or 2), which should take minutes/hours for a new player, in which time they can get a handle on how combat works before they start getting into the details. A few hundred XP can be made up in a few hours.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm glad to see the two Chaotic, hands-off settlements sticking to their alignments/philosophies as best they can.

I would offer in-game support if I weren't so sure I'd be robbed or murdered on the way due to my affiliations =)

Goblin Squad Member

I agree with the OP. I'll be surprised if this isn't already part of the plan. I suggest a 15-30 second timer that will be interrupted by taking any action (that affects the world) or damage.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Yrme wrote:
then even the most dull-witted and unimaginative midden-digger needs it too.

Scavenger here, considering picking up energetic field to better outrun bandits (but haven't yet)...

wut r u sayin bro?

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

inb4 lock

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think when do they die it should because the grass.

You know?

Goblin Squad Member

Server downtime is the same time every day (shown in the patcher). I have missed it myself a few times but I'm learning... =P

Goblin Squad Member

I think they said the Mordant Spire will only spread to 2 neighboring hexes (for now).

Goblin Squad Member

PFO is about meaningful human interaction. Reaching the end-game requires a certain amount of social investment.

Gaskon wrote:
Doc || Allegiant Gemstone Co. wrote:
I didn't get to vote on anything. I had no say or influence.

I'm sorry you feel that way. Perhaps it is a problem with your current settlement's structure?

I voted in the landrush, I am very happy with my settlement, and I am content with the amount of influence I currently have over my settlement's policies.

In a year or so, there will be an opportunity for dissatisfied players to create new settlements of their own, or attempt to burn down the ones that rejected them.

This. In PFO it's a lot easier to 'vote with your feet' (move to someplace better) than in the real world.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Harneloot wrote:
Kyutaru wrote:

A preview of PVP in the post-patch future:

You are out farming mobs or harvesting, obviously with several friends nearby. The puller takes the next mob group, then dies rather quickly. Perhaps you have overestimated this group's strength? No, you were certain only two purples existed and neither are mages.

Meanwhile, a Longbow-wielding Daredevil in Archer armor with MoO: Suffer and Stop enters Stealth once again and retreats to a safe distance, hopefully not having been noticed while the rest of your group was handling the camp mobs.

After a number of suspiciously unsuccessful pulls, you realize what's happening and advance the Logs agenda on the crowdforging site.

Anyone, anywhere, anytime; you can and will die to assassins, but will you even notice?

Unless they have been specifically hired to kill that person or are defending territory, why would anyone play the game like that? Just to make other players miserable? Why would anyone play a game just to make other people have less fun?

This seems perfectly legitimate to me, as well. What Kyutaru did not include was the reason this assassin was doing this, which may be why there is confusion. As Tink and Bludd already pointed out, there are various reasons: resource denial, hampering an enemy (if they are not war/feud targets, it will come at a large rep cost), territorial protection, or even just honing your assassin skills (again, at a large rep cost if not a war/feud target).

This is not like PvP in WoW; many might consider this sort of behavior in WoW as mean-spirited or unsportsmanlike (I wouldn't, depending on a few factors), because the assassin's guild does not gain a significant advantage by hampering your advancement.

I have never played a game where the risks/rewards for PvP were greater than what I could personally gain/lose from looting/dying, so I haven't thought everything through just yet. However, it seems to me that the Reputation mechanic is designed such that doing something like this against a group that is not an enemy (i.e. war/feud target) is a decision that must be made carefully. If you randomly kill people, your reputation will tank and you won't be able to 'use it' killing non-war targets that you might have better reasons for killing (gathering your resources near your settlement, scouting your territory/towers, etc).

TL;DR If in Kyutaru's example the assassin chose this group at random, he/she will quickly lose rep and will have to stop or be forced to live with the consequences for awhile. If there is no rep-loss from the kills, there exists a myriad of legitimate reasons for the assassin to kill them. In other words, you are right, Harneloot; if they are doing it for no other reason than 'for the lulz,' the game will punish them through the reputation mechanic. The reputation mechanic will also punish them for legitimate reasons (defending territory, etc), which makes for interesting choices about how settlements will enforce 'no trespassing' rules... and I like that =)

Goblin Squad Member

Bluddwolf wrote:
Kakafika wrote:
Bluddwolf wrote:

I personally would not respawn camp someone unless they are a feud or war target, or they have shown they are posing a consistent threat to a tower we hold.

This is especially true if they express that they are trying to vacate the area, or I can see that they are trying to.

if you try to take what you have left behind, that is a NO NO, your loot belongs to me!!

Basically this, except I'm not sure I would spawncamp somebody only because they are a feud or war target.
Spawn camping a feud or war target is one way of keeping them off the battlefield. All is fare in warfare!! You can not grief a war target, especially one who is on the side that started the war.

That's why I said "I'm not sure." =)

We will see what makes sense to me when it happens... I don't have any experience with PvP like this.

Goblin Squad Member

Bluddwolf wrote:

I personally would not respawn camp someone unless they are a feud or war target, or they have shown they are posing a consistent threat to a tower we hold.

This is especially true if they express that they are trying to vacate the area, or I can see that they are trying to.

if you try to take what you have left behind, that is a NO NO, your loot belongs to me!!

Basically this, except I'm not sure I would spawncamp somebody only because they are a feud or war target.

Goblin Squad Member

This will be a useful tool when I try to calculate how far away from Bluddwolf I need to be for my coin to be not worth his time =)

Goblin Squad Member

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I think Scorchbark had more to do with his embarrassment than sspitfire did.

Goblin Squad Member

DeciusBrutus wrote:
0: You have what you hold.

This is really what I think it will come down to. Neighbors will naturally try to avoid conflict at home by making agreements, but I don't see why anybody else would respect those agreements.

The only River Kingdoms-wide agreement I know of is the NAP which covers the core 6 towers around a settlement. Those towers allow a PC settlement to offer more training than an NPC settlement. That is the point that most can get behind e). After that point, I think e) will dwindle to the dedicated few pacifists and those that in reality have an interest in one or the other party. I don't know everybody, and definitely not more people than Thod, so I could be wrong; we will see =)

Goblin Squad Member

Thod wrote:
Nihimon wrote:
Thod wrote:
a) Proximity - the closer the tower is to you, the stronger the claim

I think you need to consider the possibility that your particular reading of this point may not be as pertinent to other Settlements that aren't in your situation - namely, Settlements that are in alliances where Tower assignments aren't based on proximity to a single Settlement.

Specifically, you've told me before that you won't recognize a claim by Phaeros of a Tower that's 2 hexes away from Hammerfall, if it's closer to Emerald Lodge than it is to Phaeros. Given that Hammerfall is a close ally of Phaeros, and given that Hammerfall and Phaeros (along with our other allies) made our internal Tower assignments based on what's best for the alliance as a whole rather than what's best for any single Settlement, I would ask you to publicly clarify your reading of "proximity".

People should read everything and not pick out what they like or dislike depending on who posts it.

The claim in this case would be covered under c). So this is a great example that you actually already follow what I have written.

I think he was specifically asking if you accept the transfer of Hammerfall's claims to those towers to Phaeros, as described by method c).

I don't think there was any malicious discrimination there, just a practical clarification and a question whether you agree, given a past statement =)

It's possible that when you made that post you didn't know that Hammerfall had done that (I can't find your post to reference).

Goblin Squad Member

This may be the most interesting story to come out of PFO yet! I look forward to its happy conclusion.

Goblin Squad Member

Thank you for sharing this guide!

Goblin Squad Member

You're normally so polite, I think we can forgive any missteps :)

Best wishes for you and your family, and here's to a more fortunate 2015! *clink*

Goblin Squad Member

Happy holidays! =)

Goblin Squad Member

Good luck, hope to see you around soon!

Goblin Squad Member

Andius the Afflicted wrote:
3. Edit Function - Will we able to edit posts? How long after they are posted can we edit them?

I hope they allow unlimited editing of OPs, so recruitment and information threads don't need to be constantly re-posted as things change =)

Goblin Squad Member

I agree with you your goal completely, Guurzak. Here's how I've been thinking about fast travel in PFO (besides thinking along the same lines as the above posters):

The geography is such that there are only a handful of chokepoints at which to access another 'elevation,' which increases the number of hexes needed to travel to reach a destination. It also potentially increases the risk of bumping into bandits.

Bandits will be able to Ambush people out of Fast Travel (this used to be a function of the now defunct hideout structure, but I think bandits can still do this). I also seem to remember mention of NPC monsters from nearby escalations possibly being able to do the same, but I could be wrong there (in which case, add it, GW! Another good reason to have a strong force of PvEers in your settlement: clear escalations from major highways!)

I hope there will be ways for settlements and/or POIs to affect fast travel in their areas.

Goblin Squad Member

That write-up is sexy.

I have come to hold many of you in high regard, and wish Ozem's Vigil the best of luck in the Land Rush!

Goblin Squad Member

I hadn't even considered the possibility that DT's might not be in on day 1.

Goblin Squad Member

FMS Quietus wrote:

I never defined what the two large groups are. I would never suggest that members of either group all felt the same way and never suggested as such.

I will say that there is no settlement or company that I'm aware of that is a part of both the Northern Coalition and the Accord. There was and still is an 'Us vs Them' mentality on both sides. I know this because we have found ourselves at times caught in the middle of that very situation. That is what I'm commenting on and this is from personal experience.

Now to your second and most offensive comment. You challenge Ozem's Vigil as being independent. I challenge you to tell me what we have done to 'drag Pax's rhetoric in here.' I want specifics on what I said in that quote above that in anyway is "Pax's rhetoric."

Rhetoric btw has a negative connotation.
Here's the definition for you:
: language that is intended to influence people and that may not be honest or reasonable.
here's the link
Your question about our independence by saying "if" and using the word "rhetoric" already tells me about your preconceived biased outlook and why you probably "cringed" to respond.

But continuing on...you ask that we could demonstrate it?
How about this. We have nothing to prove to you.

Instead, how about you demonstrate something to me and have the Accord offer an olive branch out to Aeternum and Golgotha. Ask them to join your Accord.

You want to say there isn't an "Us VS Them" mentality? Prove it.

It would make the rest of us that are independent...yes...really independent...lives a lot easier in dealing with negotiations on future settlements.

I'm over the drama and done playing.

And for the record - reading your reply was just as cringing, so consider us even.

*DE-ESCALATION, ENGAGED*

I am not going to respond, because you already know that I was referring to T7V vs Pax as the 'rhetoric' I thought you brought in here (and yes I did use the word purposefully). There was a time of confusion when some believed the issue was simply a political battle between 2 large groups; I just wanted to point out that the evidence out there is to the contrary.

We do not want to derail this perfectly fine thread by bringing up the thread that shall not be named, right?

Like I said, I tried to keep the drama level low in my posts, but I anticipated a flare-up =/ Sorry for my part in dredging this up, all!

Editted to be better...

Goblin Squad Member

Ok so now I see my problem, after realizing which settlement icon was for Thod's friends... I actually thought the Emerald Spire was located in the strange swamplands between Z and Y!

I see now the 7 plains hexes between Golgotha and Thod's Friends must be the Emerald Spire. Thanks for clearing that up for me, sorry! Carry on...

Goblin Squad Member

I think you bring up some important points to think on, Calidor. I especially agree that the first impression is a big deal. I think I've only ever seen 2 reviews for MMOs after they have had some patches, and I didn't end up buying the games despite my interest because my buddies had already shunned them.

This quote gives me a lot of hope:

Ryan Dancey wrote:
I think that if I had seen Rust before we planned Pathfinder Online we might have risked a much more minimum game than we did. As it is, we're still pretty "minimum" compared to what most people think of when they think of an MMO, but there's a pretty robust game in there already. It's a long way more complex than Rust.

Of course, as you said (along with Morbis in the quoted thread), the subscription model adds another element to the equation.

Goblin Squad Member

Shane Gifford of Fidelis wrote:
Kakafika wrote:

Indeed. I tried to keep my post short!

Like I said in my post, which you took care to quote, many people from T7V were 'pro-Golgotha,' so I find it difficult to perceive it as T7V vs. Golgotha.

The only large group that all came out on one side of the issue was Pax. Pax Aeternum, Golgotha, and Fidelis. As I said, those weren't the only people that held that position.

EDIT: And of course there were numerous people from all groups, large and small, that simply didn't voice their opinions, feeling it wasn't worth getting tangled up in the situation =P

First, sorry if my post came off as poking anyone in the eye; I certainly didn't and don't mean any harm by it. I should have phrased it as a question to Kakafika, because it's obvious now that I misread his post.

I assumed your first sentence meant something you didn't mean by it by parsing it differently than intended. I read it as "one large group on one side vs. many persons from diverse small groups on the other", and I thought by that you were saying the argument was Pax against the rest of the community. With your explanation it's obvious that is not what was meant. No harm no foul, as they say.

I tried my darnedest not to post during all the arguments except to throw in some levity. Believe me, I had at least a dozen rather heated posts that I deleted before submitting when I realized they would do nothing but add fuel to the fire.

I didn't see it that way; no worries. And I was doing likewise; simply trying to block the eye poke (scroll down to the first photo) =P

I was cringing while posting what I did because I was anticipating some would read what they expected to see and not what I wanted to communicate. I actually breathed a sigh of relief when I saw Morbis's post (before he edited to address mine). I recognize I should have made it clearer for those that specifically avoided that thread that Pax had non-Pax support; anybody that didn't avoid that thread certainly came away from it seeing that it was a very divisive subject for the community.

Goblin Squad Member

If I'm not mistaken, that's swampland around the Spire, rather than plains. It may be portrayed differently in the PnP materials, I haven't taken a look yet =)

Goblin Squad Member

Indeed. I tried to keep my post short!

Like I said in my post, which you took care to quote, many people from T7V were 'pro-Golgotha,' so I find it difficult to perceive it as T7V vs. Golgotha.

The only large group that all came out on one side of the issue was Pax. Pax Aeternum, Golgotha, and Fidelis. As I said, those weren't the only people that held that position.

EDIT: And of course there were numerous people from all groups, large and small, that simply didn't voice their opinions, feeling it wasn't worth getting tangled up in the situation =P

Goblin Squad Member

It is my understanding that you begin using your Kickstarter play time when you activate your account to enter the world. I believe this was stated several times in various places, but unfortunately it was so long ago I can't remember where =P

So for me, depending on how Alpha looks at the end, I may wait a few months until more of the systems that I'm interested in have entered the game

EDIT: That's what I get for leaving my browser open for 13 minutes before responding ><

Goblin Squad Member

Lam wrote:
Putting name or other words with a crafted item is not minimum viable product and has resource and complexity issues. Look to be much later and may involve store. As an example, could more than one person use same label? How much more to have unique or sole user of a label?

Hmm, yeah maybe naming an item should be a store item. A player could purchase the ability to rename an item and send the name they want in for approval. That way they could charge $1 or w/e to cover the costs of having a goblin browse through a list of suggested names once a day to 'ok' them. Of course, a player should thread their named items to avoid losing them =)

Goblin Squad Member

Am I The Only One? wrote:
It isn't these guys?

aaaaahhhahahahahaha

thanks for sharing that. wonderfully absurd

Goblin Squad Member

FMS Quietus wrote:
Two large groups having a spat does not equate to the whole community. I agree with you about drama and not having time for it. Ozem's Vigil is the ONLY settlement in the top ten that's independent. We stand firm in our independence and will form alliances on a case by case basis per settlement for now. More groups have stepped forward as well with the same stance. I'm happy to see this because it starts to tear down the Us vs Them mentality that's been prevalent of late.

It was not two large groups, it was one large group and many persons from diverse groups, a handful of which were from another large group... a group from which many other members held an opposing view.

If Ozem's Vigil is independent, you could demonstrate it by not dragging Pax's rhetoric in here.

I'm making this short and sweet because I'm cringing posting this almost as much as when I read the above quote ><

Goblin Squad Member

Congrats Green Mountain Militia and Elkhaven, and good luck in the land rush... though it seems you won't be needing it =)

Goblin Squad Member

I really see no reason to punish the low-rep characters further by allowing anybody to attack them without consequence.

I think that those that want to dish out cold vengeance should resign themselves to not being the most reputable pinnacles of law and goodness.

We have an alignment system and a reputation system, let them work .

Goblin Squad Member

Phaeros will be poorer for losing you, but I wish you the best in the Land Rush!

Goblin Squad Member

Welcome, Bonny!

Goblin Squad Member

Every open PvP MMO I'm aware of has RPKing without many/any limits. In my mind, PFO is different from ALL of the rest in that it is making a reduction of RPKing a core principle of the game (rather than attempting it and mostly failing, as some have done).

Note that I like RPKing; I've just resigned myself to accepting that it is being limited in PFO.

Goblin Squad Member

Nightdrifter wrote:
(unless you have an alpha invite to give away ;)

It begins!

For anybody giving out alpha invites, my skills are:

Can trample foes.

Can eat lots of plants.

Hmm... maybe I need to work on some new skills...

Goblin Squad Member

BurnHavoc, I feel for you man, but I just don't think GW is going to give up on the rep mechanic. It's a central part of their plan to reduce Random Player Killing.

We're not sure how much RPKing will be tolerated yet. The point at which a player is deemed a low-rep murder hobo may be 1 unsanctioned kill per hour/day/week.

That said, I don't think it will be hard to find somebody that you can kill without rep penalties. There are: Criminals, Bounties, Feuds, Wars, Factional hostilities, Voluntary PvP flags, and SADs (I thought if they refuse there is no rep loss to killing?) for instance.

I think the sort of PvP GW is trying to encourage is settlement vs settlement rather than player vs randomplayer.

EDIT: Ninja'd =(

Goblin Squad Member

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Take that bull&%*# elsewhere. I have a steak in this Company, so don't be surprised by my leathery response.

It would behoove you to think twice before churning out more of those cheesy puns.

What's your beef with us, anyway?

EDIT: Yup, our forums are still down.

Goblin Squad Member

-_-

Goblin Squad Member

We're glad to have you guys!

Goblin Squad Member

Welcome to new signatory ispq and The Iron Gauntlet!

I look forward to visiting your bastion of justice and commerce during EE =)

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Nihimon hasn't forced any Roseblood Accord or T7V member into any action, nor can any member do the same to him.

This is obvious to anybody genuinely interested in the truth; look back at all the friends of Nihimon that publicly posted their disagreements with him in this and other threads, sometimes very passionate disagreements.

The UNC withdrew their application willingly when they realized they would not be able to extort money from members in exchange for not raiding their caravans; stop pretending to be wounded. The 'extra' questions asked of you were necessary, apparently, because the UNC did not have the same idea of what the Accord is as every member then and since. That was the fear when the questions were asked, and it turns out that fear was justified.

Please, stop trying to manufacture and dredge up events long past.

Please ignore Xeen with extreme prejudice. He has a reputation.

1 to 50 of 654 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2015 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.